Efficacy and safety of BVAC-C in HPV type 16- or 18-positive cervical carcinoma who failed 1st platinum-based chemotherapy: a phase I/IIa study.

Background: BVAC-C, a B cell- and monocyte-based immunotherapeutic vaccine transfected with recombinant HPV E6/E7, was well tolerated in HPV-positive recurrent cervical carcinoma patients in a phase I study. This phase IIa study investigates the antitumor activity of BVAC-C in patients with HPV 16- or 18-positive cervical cancer who had experienced recurrence after a platinum-based combination chemotherapy. Patients and methods: Patients were allocated to 3 arms; Arm 1, BVAC-C injection at 0, 4, 8 weeks; Arm 2, BVAC-C injection at 0, 4, 8, 12 weeks; Arm 3, BVAC-C injection at 0, 4, 8, 12 weeks with topotecan at 2, 6, 10, 14 weeks. Primary endpoints were safety and objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by an independent radiologist according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Secondary endpoints included the disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: Of the 30 patients available for analysis, the ORR was 19.2% (Arm 1: 20.0% (3/15), Arm 2: 33.3% (2/6), Arm3: 0%) and the DCR was 53.8% (Arm 1: 57.1%, Arm 2: 28.6%, Arm3: 14.3%). The median DOR was 7.5 months (95% CI 7.1-not reported), the median PFS was 5.8 months (95% CI 4.2-10.3), and the median OS was 17.7 months (95% CI 12.0-not reported). All evaluated patients showed not only inflammatory cytokine responses (IFN-γ or TNF-α) but also potent E6/E7-specific T cell responses upon vaccinations. Immune responses of patients after vaccination were correlated with their clinical responses. Conclusion: BVAC-C represents a promising treatment option and a manageable safety profile in the second-line setting for this patient population. Further studies are needed to identify potential biomarkers of response. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02866006.

Dendritic cell vaccination combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel for metastatic endometrial cancer patients: results of a phase I/II trial.

Background: Metastatic endometrial cancer (mEC) continues to have a poor prognosis despite the introduction of several novel therapies including immune checkpoints inhibitors. Dendritic cell (DC) vaccination is known to be a safe immunotherapeutic modality that can induce immunological and clinical responses in patients with solid tumors. Platinum-based chemotherapy is known to act synergistically with immunotherapy by selectively depleting suppressive immune cells. Therefore, we investigated the immunological efficacy of combined chemoimmunotherapy with an autologous DC vaccine and carboplatin/paclitaxel chemotherapy. Study design: This is a prospective, exploratory, single-arm phase I/II study (NCT04212377) in 7 patients with mEC. The DC vaccine consisted of blood-derived conventional and plasmacytoid dendritic cells, loaded with known mEC antigens Mucin-1 and Survivin. Chemotherapy consisted of carboplatin/paclitaxel, given weekly for 6 cycles and three-weekly for 3 cycles. The primary endpoint was immunological vaccine efficacy; secondary endpoints were safety and feasibility. Results: Production of DC vaccines was successful in five out of seven patients. These five patients started study treatment and all were able to complete the entire treatment schedule. Antigen-specific responses could be demonstrated in two of the five patients who were treated. All patients had at least one adverse event grade 3 or higher. Treatment-related adverse events grade ≥3 were related to chemotherapy rather than DC vaccination; neutropenia was most common. Suppressive myeloid cells were selectively depleted in peripheral blood after chemotherapy. Conclusion: DC vaccination can be safely combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with metastatic endometrial cancer and induces antigen-specific responses in a minority of patients. Longitudinal immunological phenotyping is suggestive of a synergistic effect of the combination.

A shared neoantigen vaccine combined with immune checkpoint blockade for advanced metastatic solid tumors: phase 1 trial interim results.

Therapeutic vaccines that elicit cytotoxic T cell responses targeting tumor-specific neoantigens hold promise for providing long-term clinical benefit to patients with cancer. Here we evaluated safety and tolerability of a therapeutic vaccine encoding 20 shared neoantigens derived from selected common oncogenic driver mutations as primary endpoints in an ongoing phase 1/2 study in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors. Secondary endpoints included immunogenicity, overall response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival. Eligible patients were selected if their tumors expressed one of the human leukocyte antigen-matched tumor mutations included in the vaccine, with the majority of patients (18/19) harboring a mutation in KRAS. The vaccine regimen, consisting of a chimp adenovirus (ChAd68) and self-amplifying mRNA (samRNA) in combination with the immune checkpoint inhibitors ipilimumab and nivolumab, was shown to be well tolerated, with observed treatment-related adverse events consistent with acute inflammation expected with viral vector-based vaccines and immune checkpoint blockade, the majority grade 1/2. Two patients experienced grade 3/4 serious treatment-related adverse events that were also dose-limiting toxicities. The overall response rate was 0%, and median progression-free survival and overall survival were 1.9 months and 7.9 months, respectively. T cell responses were biased toward human leukocyte antigen-matched TP53 neoantigens encoded in the vaccine relative to KRAS neoantigens expressed by the patients' tumors, indicating a previously unknown hierarchy of neoantigen immunodominance that may impact the therapeutic efficacy of multiepitope shared neoantigen vaccines. These data led to the development of an optimized vaccine exclusively targeting KRAS-derived neoantigens that is being evaluated in a subset of patients in phase 2 of the clinical study. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03953235 .

A phase 1 trial of human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT) vaccination combined with therapeutic strategies to control immune-suppressor mechanisms.

The presence of inhibitory immune cells and difficulty in generating activated effector T cells remain obstacles to development of effective cancer vaccines. We designed a vaccine regimen combining human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT) peptides with concomitant therapies targeting regulatory T cells (Tregs) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2)-mediated immunosuppression. This Phase 1 trial combined an hTERT-derived 7-peptide library, selected to ensure presentation by both HLA class-I and class-II in 90% of patients, with oral low-dose cyclophosphamide (to modulate Tregs) and the COX2 inhibitor celecoxib. Adjuvants were Montanide and topical TLR-7 agonist, to optimise antigen presentation. The primary objective was determination of the safety and tolerability of this combination therapy, with anti-cancer activity, immune response and detection of antigen-specific T cells as additional endpoints. Twenty-nine patients with advanced solid tumours were treated. All were multiply-pretreated, and the majority had either colorectal or prostate cancer. The most common adverse events were injection-site reactions, fatigue and nausea. Median progression-free survival was 9 weeks, with no complete or partial responses, but 24% remained progression-free for ≥6 months. Immunophenotyping showed post-vaccination expansion of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells with effector phenotypes. The in vitro re-challenge of T cells with hTERT peptides, TCR sequencing, and TCR similarity index analysis demonstrated the expansion following vaccination of oligoclonal T cells with specificity for hTERT. However, a population of exhausted PD-1+ cytotoxic T cells was also expanded in vaccinated patients. This vaccine combination regimen was safe and associated with antigen-specific immunological responses. Clinical activity could be improved in future by combination with anti-PD1 checkpoint inhibition to address the emergence of an exhausted T cell population.

Randomized open-label controlled study of cancer vaccine OSE2101 versus chemotherapy in HLA-A2-positive patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with resistance to immunotherapy: ATALANTE-1.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) ultimately progress either rapidly (primary resistance) or after durable benefit (secondary resistance). The cancer vaccine OSE2101 may invigorate antitumor-specific immune responses after ICB failure. The objective of ATALANTE-1 was to evaluate its efficacy and safety in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ATALANTE-1 was a two-step open-label study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OSE2101 compared to standard-of-care (SoC) chemotherapy (CT). Patients with human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-A2-positive advanced NSCLC without actionable alterations, failing sequential or concurrent CT and ICB were randomized (2 : 1) to OSE2101 or SoC (docetaxel or pemetrexed). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Interim OS futility analysis was planned as per Fleming design. In April 2020 at the time of interim analysis, a decision was taken to prematurely stop the accrual due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Final analysis was carried out in all patients and in the subgroup of patients with ICB secondary resistance defined as failure after ICB monotherapy second line ≥12 weeks. RESULTS: Two hundred and nineteen patients were randomized (139 OSE2101, 80 SoC); 118 had secondary resistance to sequential ICB. Overall, median OS non-significantly favored OSE2101 over SoC {hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] 0.86 [0.62-1.19], P = 0.36}. In the secondary resistance subgroup, OSE2101 significantly improved median OS versus SoC [11.1 versus 7.5 months; HR (95% CI) 0.59 (0.38-0.91), P = 0.017], and significantly improved post-progression survival (HR 0.46, P = 0.004), time to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status deterioration (HR 0.43, P = 0.006) and Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) global health status compared to SoC (P = 0.045). Six-month disease control rates and progression-free survival were similar between groups. Grade ≥3 adverse effects occurred in 11.4% of patients with OSE2101 and 35.1% in SoC (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In HLA-A2-positive patients with advanced NSCLC and secondary resistance to immunotherapy, OSE2101 increased survival with better safety compared to CT. Further evaluation in this population is warranted.

Therapeutic Vaccination against Human Papillomavirus Type 16 for the Treatment of High-Grade Anal Intraepithelial Neoplasia in HIV+ Men.

PURPOSE: Anal cancer is increasing in HIV+ men who have sex with men (MSM). Treatment options for its precursor, high-grade anal intraepithelial neoplasia (HGAIN), are suboptimal. In this phase I to II dose-finding study, we assessed the safety and efficacy of the human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV16) synthetic long peptide vaccine (SLP-HPV-01) in HIV+ MSM with HPV16-positive HGAIN. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four dosage schedules (1-5-10; 5-10-20; 10-20-40; and 40-40-40-40 µg) of SLP-HPV-01 were administered intradermally with a 3-week interval in 10 patients per dose level (DL). In each dose group, 5 patients also received 1 µg/kg pegylated IFNα-2b subcutaneously. Primary endpoints were safety and regression of HGAIN at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: Eighty-one of 134 screened patients (60%) had HPV16-negative HGAIN lesions, leaving 53 eligible patients. Thirteen patients were excluded, leaving 40 men. The vaccine was well tolerated. One patient developed a generalized rash. The highest dosage level induced the strongest immune responses. There was no indication for stronger reactivity in the IFNα groups. Up to 18 months of follow-up, 8/38 intention-to-treat patients had a complete clinical and histologic response and one had a partial response (in total 9/38, 23.7%). At the highest dosage level, the clinical response was 4/10 (40%). Stronger immune responses were detected among clinical responders. CONCLUSIONS: The highest DL is safe, immunogenic, and associated with clinical responses to HPV16-induced lesions. However, as the majority of HGAIN is caused by the other HPV types, further studies should aim at pan-HPV vaccination to prevent or treat HGAIN.

Evaluation of the interest to combine a CD4 Th1-inducer cancer vaccine derived from telomerase and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized non-comparative phase II study (TERTIO - PRODIGE 82).

BACKGROUND: Several cancer immunotherapies that target the PD-L1/PD-1 pathway show promising clinical activity in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the standard of care in first-line treatment with atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1 therapy) in combination with bevacizumab is associated with a limited objective response rate. Telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) activation meets the criteria of oncogenic addiction in HCC and could be actionable therapeutic target and a relevant tumor antigen. Therefore we hypothesized that combining anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy with an anti-telomerase vaccine might be an attractive therapy in HCC. UCPVax is a therapeutic cancer vaccine composed of two separate peptides derived from telomerase (human TERT). UCPVax has been evaluated in a multicenter phase I/II study in non-small cell lung cancers and has demonstrated to be safe and immunogenic, and is under evaluation in combination with atezolizumab in a phase II clinical trial in tumors where telomerase reactivation contributes to an oncogene addiction (HPV+ cancers). The aim of the TERTIO study is to determine the clinical interest and immunological efficacy of a treatment combining the CD4 helper T-inducer cancer anti-telomerase vaccine (UCPVax) with atezolizumab and bevacizumab in unresectable HCC in a multicenter randomized phase II study. METHODS: Patients with locally advanced, metastatic or unresectable HCC who have not previously received systemic anti-cancer treatment are eligible. The primary end point is the objective response rate at 6 months. Patients will be allocated to a treatment arm with a randomization 2:1. In both arms, patients will receive atezolizumab at fixed dose of 1200 mg IV infusion and bevacizumab at fixed dose of 15 mg/kg IV infusion, every 3 weeks, according to the standard of care. In the experimental arm, these treatments will be combined with the UCPVax vaccine at 0.5 mg subcutaneously. DISCUSSION: Combining anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy with an anti-telomerase vaccine gains serious consideration in HCC, in order to extend the clinical efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1. Indeed, anti-cancer vaccines can induce tumor-specific T cell expansion and activation and therefore restore the cancer-immunity cycle in patients lacking pre-existing anti-tumor responses. Thus, there is a strong rational to combine immune checkpoint blockade therapy and anticancer vaccine (UCPVax) in order to activate antitumor T cell immunity and bypass the immunosuppression in the tumor microenvironment in HCC. This pivotal proof of concept study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of a CD4 Th1-inducer cancer vaccine derived from telomerase (UCPVax) and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable HCC, as well as confirming their synergic mechanism, and settling the basis for a new combination for future clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05528952.

Phase II Trial of Nelipepimut-S Peptide Vaccine in Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.

NeuVax is a vaccine comprised of the HER2-derived MHC class I peptide E75 (nelipepimut-S, NPS) combined with GM-CSF. We completed a randomized trial of preoperative vaccination with NeuVax versus GM-CSF alone in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The primary objective was to evaluate for NPS-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) responses. Patients with human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-A2-positive DCIS were enrolled and randomized 2:1 to NeuVax versus GM-CSF alone and received two inoculations prior to surgery. The number of NPS-specific CTL was measured pre-vaccination, at surgery, and 1 and 3 to 6 months post-operation by dextramer assay. Differences in CTL responses between groups and between pre-vaccination and 1-month post-operation were analyzed using a two-sample t test or Wilcoxon rank sum test. The incidence and severity of adverse events were compared between groups. Overall, 45 patients were registered; 20 patients were HLA-A2 negative, 7 declined participation, 1 withdrew, and 4 failed screening for other reasons. The remaining 13 were randomized to NeuVax (n = 9) or GM-CSF alone (n = 4). Vaccination was well-tolerated with similar treatment-related toxicity between groups with the majority (>89%) of adverse events being grade 1. The percentage of NPS-specific CTLs increased in both arms between baseline (pre-vaccination) and 1-month post-operation. The increase was numerically greater in the NPS+GM-CSF arm, but the difference was not statistically significant. NPS+GM-CSF is safe and well-tolerated when given preoperatively to patients with DCIS. In patients with HLA-A2-positive DCIS, two inoculations with NPS+GM-CSF can induce in vivo immunity and a continued antigen-specific T-cell response 1-month postsurgery. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: This trial showed that vaccination of patients with HLA-A2-positive DCIS with NeuVax in the preoperative setting can induce a sustained antigen-specific T-cell response. This provides proof of principle that vaccination in the preoperative or adjuvant setting may stimulate an adaptive immune response that could potentially prevent disease recurrence.

Safety and efficacy of autologous cell vaccines in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials.

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials to formally assess the safety and efficacy of autologous whole cell vaccines as immunotherapies for solid tumors. Our primary safety outcome was number, and grade of adverse events. Our primary efficacy outcome was clinical responses. Secondary outcomes included survival metrics and correlative immune assays. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies published between 1946 and August 2020 using any autologous whole cell product in the treatment of any solid tumor. The Cochrane Randomized Controlled Trial risk of bias tool was used to assess risk of bias. Eighteen manuscripts were identified with a total of 714 patients enrolled in control and 808 in vaccine arms. In 698 patients receiving at least one dose of vaccine, treatment was well tolerated with a total of 5 grade III or higher adverse events. Clinical response was reported in a minority (n = 2, 14%) of studies. Autologous cell vaccines were associated with improved overall (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.01-1.63) and disease-free survival (HR 1.33, 95% CI 1.05-1.67) over thirteen and ten trials respectively. Where reported, immune assays correlated well with clinical outcomes. Our results suggest that autologous whole cell vaccination is safe and efficacious in increasing survival in patients undergoing treatment for solid tumors.Registration: PROSPERO CRD42019140187.

Safety, Immunogenicity, and 1-Year Efficacy of Universal Cancer Peptide-Based Vaccine in Patients With Refractory Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase Ib/Phase IIa De-Escalation Study.

PURPOSE: Universal cancer peptide-based vaccine (UCPVax) is a therapeutic vaccine composed of two highly selected helper peptides to induce CD4+ T helper-1 response directed against telomerase. This phase Ib/IIa trial was designed to test the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of a three-dose schedule in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with refractory NSCLC were assigned to receive three vaccination doses of UCPVax (0.25 mg, 0.5 mg, and 1 mg) using a Bayesian-based phase Ib followed by phase IIa de-escalating design. The primary end points were dose-limiting toxicity and immune response after three first doses of vaccine. Secondary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients received UCPVax; 95% had three prior lines of systemic therapy. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed in 15 patients treated in phase Ib. The maximum tolerated dose was 1 mg. Fifty-one patients were eligible for phase IIa. The third and sixth dose of UCPVax induced specific CD4+ T helper 1 response in 56% and 87.2% of patients, respectively, with no difference between three dose levels. Twenty-one (39%) patients achieved disease control (stable disease, n = 20; complete response, n = 1). The 1-year OS was 34.1% (95% CI, 23.1 to 50.4), and the median OS was 9.7 months, with no significant difference between dose levels. The 1-year progression-free survival and the median OS were 17.2% (95% CI, 7.8 to 38.3) and 11.6 months (95% CI, 9.7 to 16.7) in immune responders (P = .015) and 4.5% (95% CI, 0.7 to 30.8) and 5.6 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 10) in nonresponders (P = .005), respectively. CONCLUSION: UCPVax was highly immunogenic and safe and provide interesting 1-year OS rate in heavily pretreated advanced NSCLC.

Arginase-1 targeting peptide vaccine in patients with metastatic solid tumors - A phase I trial.

Background: Arginase-1-producing cells inhibit T cell-mediated anti-tumor responses by reducing L-arginine levels in the tumor microenvironment. T cell-facilitated elimination of arginase-1-expressing cells could potentially restore L-arginine levels and improve anti-tumor responses. The activation of arginase-1-specific T cells may convert the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment and induce or strengthen local Th1 inflammation. In the current clinical study, we examined the safety and immunogenicity of arginase-1-based peptide vaccination. Methods: In this clinical phase I trial, ten patients with treatment-refractory progressive solid tumors were treated. The patients received an arginase-1 peptide vaccine comprising three 20-mer peptides from the ARG1 immunological "hot spot" region in combination with the adjuvant Montanide ISA-51. The vaccines were administered subcutaneously every third week (maximum 16 vaccines). The primary endpoint was to evaluate safety assessed by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events 4.0 and laboratory monitoring. Vaccine-specific immune responses were evaluated using enzyme-linked immune absorbent spot assays and intracellular cytokine staining on peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Clinical responses were evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. Results: The vaccination was feasible, and no vaccine-related grade 3-4 adverse events were registered. Nine (90%) of ten patients exhibited peptide-specific immune responses in peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Six (86%) of the seven evaluable patients developed a reactive T cell response against at least one of the ARG1 peptides during treatment. A phenotypic classification revealed that arginase-1 vaccine-specific T cells were both CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells. Two (20%) of ten patients obtained stable disease for respectively four- and seven months on vaccination treatment. Conclusion: The peptide vaccine against arginase-1 was safe. Nine (90%) of ten patients had measurable peptide-specific responses in the periphery blood, and two (20%) of ten patients attained stable disease on protocol treatment. Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03689192, identifier NCT03689192.

A phase I study of an adenoviral vector delivering a MUC1/CD40-ligand fusion protein in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma.

Cancer vaccines as immunotherapy for solid tumours are currently in development with promising results. We report a phase 1 study of Ad-sig-hMUC1/ecdCD40L (NCT02140996), an adenoviral-vector vaccine encoding the tumour-associated antigen MUC1 linked to CD40 ligand, in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma. The primary objective of this study is safety and tolerability. We also study the immunome in vaccinated patients as a secondary outcome. This trial, while not designed to determine clinical efficacy, reports an exploratory endpoint of overall response rate. The study meets its pre-specified primary endpoint demonstrating safety and tolerability in a cohort of 21 patients with advanced adenocarcinomas (breast, lung and ovary). The maximal dose of the vaccine is 1 ×1011 viral particles, with no dose limiting toxicities. All drug related adverse events are of low grades, most commonly injection site reactions in 15 (71%) patients. Using exploratory high-dimensional analyses, we find both quantitative and relational changes in the cancer immunome after vaccination. Our data highlights the utility of high-dimensional analyses in understanding and predicting effective immunotherapy, underscoring the importance of immune competency in cancer prognosis.

Current and emerging immunotherapeutic approaches for biliary tract cancers.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) comprise a heterogeneous group of aggressive malignancies with unfavorable prognoses. The benefit of chemotherapy seems to have reached a bottleneck and, therefore, new effective therapeutic strategies for advanced BTCs are needed. Molecularly targeted therapies in selected patients are rapidly changing the situation. However, the low frequency of specific driver alterations in BTCs limits their wide application. Recently, immunotherapeutic approaches are also under active investigation in BTCs, but the role of immunotherapy in BTCs remains controversial. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, and meeting resources were searched for relevant articles published from January 2017 to May 2022. The search aimed to identify current and emerging immunotherapeutic approaches for BTCs. Information on clinical trials was obtained from https://clinicaltrials.gov/ and http://www.chictr.org.cn/. RESULTS: Immunotherapy in BTC patients is currently under investigation, and most of the investigations focused on the application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, only a subgroup of BTCs with microsatellite-instability high (MSI-H)/DNA mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) or tumor mutational burden-high (TMB-H) benefit from monotherapy of ICIs, and limited activity was observed in the second or subsequent settings. Nevertheless, promising results come from studies of ICIs in combination with other therapeutic approaches, including chemotherapy, in advanced BTCs, with a moderate toxicity profile. Recent studies demonstrated that compared to GEMCIS alone, durvalumab plus GEMCIS significantly improved patient survival (TOPAZ-1 trial) and that ICIs-combined chemoimmunotherapy is poised to become a new frontline therapy option, regardless of TMB and MMR/MSI status. Adoptive cell therapy and peptide- or dendritic-based cancer vaccines are other immunotherapeutic options that are being studied in BTCs. Numerous biomarkers have been investigated to define their predictive role in response to ICIs, but no predictive biomarker has been validated, except MSI-H/dMMR. CONCLUSIONS: The role of immunotherapy in BTCs is currently under investigation and the results of ongoing studies are eagerly anticipated. Several studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of ICIs in combination with chemotherapy in treatment-naive patients, such as the phase III TOPAZ-1 trial, which will change the standard care of first-line chemotherapy for advanced BTCs. However, further research is needed to understand the best combination with immunotherapy and to discover more predictive biomarkers to guide clinical practice.

A Therapeutic Antigen-Presenting Cell-Targeting DNA Vaccine VB10.16 in HPV16-Positive High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: Results from a Phase I/IIa Trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety, immunogenicity and efficacy of a therapeutic DNA vaccine VB10.16, using a unique modular vaccine technology that is based on linking antigens to CCL3L1 targeting module, in women with HPV16-positive high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a first-in-human, open-label, phase I/IIa clinical trial of VB10.16 in subjects with confirmed HPV16-positive CIN 2/3. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with adverse events, including dose-limiting toxicities. Secondary outcome measures included measuring the E6/E7-specific cellular immune response. In the Expansion cohort HPV16 clearance, regression of CIN lesion size and grading were assessed during a 12-month follow-up period. RESULTS: A total of 34 women were enrolled: 16 in two dose cohorts and 18 in the expansion cohort. No serious adverse events or dose-limiting toxicities were observed, and none of the subjects discontinued treatment with VB10.16 due to an adverse event. Mild to moderate injection site reactions were the most commonly reported adverse event (79%). HPV16-specific T-cell responses were observed after vaccination in the majority of the subjects. In the expansion cohort, HPV16 clearance was seen in 8 of 17 evaluable subjects (47%). Reductions in lesion size were seen in 16 subjects (94%) and 10 subjects (59%) had regression to CIN 0/1. Correlation between strong IFNγ T-cell responses and lesion size reduction was statistically significant (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The novel therapeutic DNA vaccine VB10.16 was well tolerated and showed promising evidence of efficacy and strong HPV16-specific T-cell responses in subjects with high-grade CIN.

Clinical advances and ongoing trials on mRNA vaccines for cancer treatment.

Years of research exploring mRNA vaccines for cancer treatment in preclinical and clinical trials have set the stage for the rapid development of mRNA vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therapeutic cancer vaccines based on mRNA are well tolerated, and the inherent advantage in ease of production, which rivals the best available conventional vaccine manufacture methods, renders mRNA vaccines a promising option for cancer immunotherapy. Technological advances have optimised mRNA-based vaccine stability, structure, and delivery methods, and multiple clinical trials investigating mRNA vaccine therapy are now enrolling patients with various cancer diagnoses. Although therapeutic mRNA-based cancer vaccines have not yet been approved for standard treatment, encouraging results from early clinical trials with mRNA vaccines as monotherapy and in combination with checkpoint inhibitors have been obtained. This Review summarises the latest clinical advances in mRNA-based vaccines for cancer treatment and reflects on future perspectives and challenges for this new and promising treatment approach.

Personalized neoantigen vaccine NEO-PV-01 with chemotherapy and anti-PD-1 as first-line treatment for non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.

Neoantigens arising from mutations in tumor DNA provide targets for immune-based therapy. Here, we report the clinical and immune data from a Phase Ib clinical trial of a personalized neoantigen-vaccine NEO-PV-01 in combination with pemetrexed, carboplatin, and pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This analysis of 38 patients treated with the regimen demonstrated no treatment-related serious adverse events. Multiple parameters including baseline tumor immune infiltration and on-treatment circulating tumor DNA levels were highly correlated with clinical response. De novo neoantigen-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses were observed post-vaccination. Epitope spread to non-vaccinating neoantigens, including responses to KRAS G12C and G12V mutations, were detected post-vaccination. Neoantigen-specific CD4+ T cells generated post-vaccination revealed effector and cytotoxic phenotypes with increased CD4+ T cell infiltration in the post-vaccine tumor biopsy. Collectively, these data support the safety and immunogenicity of this regimen in advanced non-squamous NSCLC.

Emerging Management Approach for the Adverse Events of Immunotherapy of Cancer.

Immunotherapy, which stimulates the body's immune system, has received a considerable amount of press in recent years because of its powerful benefits. Cancer immunotherapy has shown long-term results in patients with advanced disease that are not seen with traditional chemotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors, cytokines like interleukin 2 (IL-2) and interferon-alpha (IFN), and the cancer vaccine sipuleucel-T have all been licensed and approved by the FDA for the treatment of various cancers. These immunotherapy treatments boost anticancer responses by stimulating the immune system. As a result, they have the potential to cause serious, even fatal, inflammatory and immune-related side effects in one or more organs. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy are two immunotherapy treatments that are increasingly being used to treat cancer. Following their widespread usage in the clinic, a wave of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) impacting virtually every system has raised concerns about their unpredictability and randomness. Despite the fact that the majority of adverse effects are minimal and should be addressed with prudence, the risk of life-threatening complications exists. Although most adverse events are small and should be treated with caution, the risk of life-threatening toxicities should not be underestimated, especially given the subtle and unusual indications that make early detection even more difficult. Treatment for these issues is difficult and necessitates a multidisciplinary approach involving not only oncologists but also other internal medicine doctors to guarantee quick diagnosis and treatment. This study's purpose is to give a fundamental overview of immunotherapy and cancer-related side effect management strategies.

Autologous dendritic cells pulsed with allogeneic tumour cell lysate induce tumour-reactive T-cell responses in patients with pancreatic cancer: A phase I study.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is notorious for its poor prognosis even after curative resection. Responses to immunotherapy are rare and related to inadequate T-cell priming. We previously demonstrated the potency of allogeneic lysate-dendritic cell (DC) vaccination in a preclinical model. Here we translate this concept to patients. METHODS: In this phase I study, patients with resected PDAC were included when they demonstrated no radiologic signs of recurrence after standard-of-care treatment. Allogeneic tumour lysate-loaded autologous monocyte-derived DCs were injected at weeks 0, 2, 4 and at months 3 and 6. Objectives are feasibility, safety and immunogenicity of allogeneic tumour-DCs. The presence of tumour antigens shared between the vaccine and patient tumours was investigated. Immunological analyses were performed on peripheral blood, skin and tumour. RESULTS: Ten patients were included. DC production and administration were successful. All patients experienced a grade 1 injection-site and infusion-related reaction. Two patients experienced a grade 2 fever and 1 patient experienced a grade 3 dyspnoea. No vaccine-related serious adverse events were observed. Shared tumour antigens were found between the vaccine and patient tumours. All evaluated patients displayed a vaccine-induced response indicated by increased frequencies of Ki67+ and activated PD-1+ circulating T-cells. In addition, treatment-induced T-cell reactivity to autologous tumour of study patients was detected. Seven out of ten patients have not experienced disease recurrence or progression at a median follow-up of 25 months (15-32 months). CONCLUSION: Allogeneic tumour lysate-DC treatment is feasible, safe and induces immune reactivity to PDAC expressed antigens.

Field Safety Experience With an Autologous Cancer Vaccine in 41 Horses: A Retrospective Study (2019-2021).

Autologous cancer vaccines (ACV) are an emerging option for adjuvant cancer treatment in veterinary medicine. With this form of active immunotherapy, the patient's tumor cells are processed ex vivo and returned to the patient with the goal of stimulating an immune response to unique, patient-specific antigens. The case accession database at Torigen was queried to identify horses that underwent biopsy or surgical resection of their primary tumor and received at least one subcutaneous dose of an adjuvanted whole-cell autologous cancer vaccine. The records were then reviewed for any reported adverse events (AE). Forty-one horses met the inclusion criteria and received 252 doses of Torigen's ACV (ACV-T). There were seven AEs reported in four horses, which were associated with 1.6% of the administered doses of the ACV-T. Of the reported AE, all were characterized as mild. The ACV-T appears to be well tolerated by horses, and may be useful as a treatment option for owners who are concerned about AEs that can occur with other types of adjuvant cancer therapy. Additional studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy of this ACV in horses with solid tumors.

Phase I/II Multicenter Trial of a Novel Therapeutic Cancer Vaccine, HepaVac-101, for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) shows considerable promise in improving clinical outcomes. HepaVac-101 represents a single-arm, first-in-human phase I/II multicenter cancer vaccine trial for HCC (NCT03203005). It combines multipeptide antigens (IMA970A) with the TLR7/8/RIG I agonist CV8102. IMA970A includes 5 HLA-A*24 and 7 HLA-A*02 as well as 4 HLA-DR restricted peptides selected after mass spectrometric identification in human HCC tissues or cell lines. CV8102 is an RNA-based immunostimulator inducing a balanced Th1/Th2 immune response. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 82 patients with very early- to intermediate-stage HCCs were enrolled and screened for suitable HLA haplotypes and 22 put on study treatment. This consisted in a single infusion of low-dose cyclophosphamide followed by nine intradermal coadministrations of IMA970A and CV8102. Only patients with no disease relapse after standard-of-care treatments were vaccinated. The primary endpoints of the HepaVac-101 clinical trial were safety, tolerability, and antigen-specific T-cell responses. Secondary or exploratory endpoints included additional immunologic parameters and survival endpoints. RESULTS: The vaccination showed a good safety profile. Transient mild-to-moderate injection-site reactions were the most frequent IMA970A/CV8102-related side effects. Immune responses against ≥1 vaccinated HLA class I tumor-associated peptide (TAA) and ≥1 vaccinated HLA class II TAA were respectively induced in 37% and 53% of the vaccinees. CONCLUSIONS: Immunotherapy may provide a great improvement in treatment options for HCC. HepaVac-101 is a first-in-human clinical vaccine trial with multiple novel HLA class I- and class II-restricted TAAs against HCC. The results are initial evidence for the safety and immunogenicity of the vaccine. Further clinical evaluations are warranted.